[Jolly2 (OP)]

Apparently now Trump is out of office it's ok to admit it.

https://thenewamerican.com/hcq-works-banning-its-use-causes-needless-suffering-and-death/

[evan_au]

Hydroxychloroquine was tested in a clinical trial.
- It did not help patients
See: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2772922

On the other hand, Ivermectin is now being tested in a clinical trial.
- Apparently, it still shows promise.
- Let's wait for the results of the clinical trial, instead of taking the word of some unqualified politician

[Bored chemist]

Apparently now Trump is out of office it's ok to admit it.

https://thenewamerican.com/hcq-works-banning-its-use-causes-needless-suffering-and-death/

That article does the classic journalese trick of asking a lot of questions without answering them.

Questions like "• “Would you acknowledge that your strategy of telling Americans to restrict their behavior, wear masks, and distance, and put their lives on hold indefinitely until there is a vaccine is not working?”"

And the reason it doesn't answer them is that the actual answer does not support their case.
So, for example, the answer to that one is that, where restrictions and masks are actually used  properly and consistently, they do reduce spread of the virus.

Betteridge's law
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines
tells us that "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."

Why don't you recognise that?

[Bored chemist]

OK, now the dust has settled, someone did the analysis.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S075333222301853X

17000 dead as a result of HCQ.

Can one of the mods correct the thread title please?

[alancalverd]

Job done, sir.

[paul cotter]

HCQ is useful in certain inflammatory conditions and possibly as an antimalarial. For covid or Trump it does not work. For Trump the triad of intelligence, rationality and wisdom is the prescription but success is not guaranteed.

[alancalverd]

Odd coincidence. Within an hour of  implementing BC's suggestion I picked up a request to review a clinical research proposal from which I learned that HCQ causes serious eye damage in about 7.5% of longterm patients. I don't usually review pharmacological research and have never previously read any papers on HCQ.

[paul cotter]

That is a known complication of chloroquine therapy and hydroxychloroquine which is an active metabolite of the former. However if one is suffering from falciparum malaria this is of little concern. When used for treatment of autoimmune illnesses regular eye checks are implemented.

[Zer0]

Odd coincidence. Within an hour of  implementing BC's suggestion I picked up a request to review a clinical research proposal from which I learned that HCQ causes serious eye damage in about 7.5% of longterm patients. I don't usually review pharmacological research and have never previously read any papers on HCQ.

Could you Please elaborate
" Long Term " .

A few days, months or years?

7.5% seems Low, doesn't it?
Perhaps it should be More.

[alancalverd]

The concern I was alerted to, and PC seems to have alluded to also, is "lifetime". And 7.5% is a lot if you are the one in 13 who suffers serious eye damage as a result of believing what a bankrupt moron told you, or doing what a doctor suggested would alleviate some other symptom.

[Zer0]

Apologies for the dumb question.

But still, why is it 7.5% & not somewhere like 30% or 40% ?
(i don't wish it to be more, i'd rather have it at 0%)

If 1 in 13 are affected, then what saves the remainder 12?

Does eye color or size or something else also factors in?

ps -
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52407177

[paul cotter]

It may be genetic factors at play. In general it is not possible to predict who will have an adverse reaction to a given drug.

[Zer0]

It may be genetic factors at play. In general it is not possible to predict who will have an adverse reaction to a given drug.

& then likewise predicting who won't have an adverse reaction would also Not be possible.

But if HCQ since it's introduction into the medical community was known to have Severe side-effects, why wasn't a Substitute seeked.

Or is it the combination of
Covid-19 + HCQ that is somehow to blame?

(& what about the Constant & Regular extreme use of sanitizers n face washing n increased screen time etc etc.)

ps - Some folks during lockdowns reported strange symptoms, like their body hair & nails growing at Twice the rate...
Only after things opened up & folks got buzy again in their routines, did the self observed phenomenon subside.

[paul cotter]

It is likely that improvements in genetics will in the future allow a prescriber to know which medications will have the most beneficial effects and the minimum of side effects--the so called "personalised medicine". We are not there yet. As regards hydroxychloroquine the eye damage is a direct effect of the medication on SOME people and it has nothing to do with covid. All medications for autoimmune conditions have serious and sometimes severe(including lethal) side effects. Quite apart from this any drug, even the humble aspirin, can have unexpected dire effects. I know a person who having taken an aspirin developed an anaphylactic reaction and whose life was saved by a local doctor who happened to be at home at the time.